Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-04-05 Thread rhurst2
John Stanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rollback is a problem with simpler software. > > You are basically specifying Sqlite in your requirements, and it does > all that wiith a small footprint based on the capability. > > You might contact Dr Hipp and enquire about a commercial version

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-04-05 Thread John Stanton
Rollback is a problem with simpler software. You are basically specifying Sqlite in your requirements, and it does all that wiith a small footprint based on the capability. You might contact Dr Hipp and enquire about a commercial version of Sqlite which strips out the SQL compiler and uses pr

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-04-03 Thread Raymond Hurst
I am an extreme newbie at this and I am open to suggestions: My requirements are: Smallest footprint possible ACID requirements (transactional rollback a must) Be able to create tables with fields that have name/value pairs. Not sure what else! If a dBase derivative meets these requireme

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-31 Thread Cesar Rodas
On 31/03/07, Cesar Rodas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 30/03/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm looking at using Sqlite as a storage backend for a program. > > > > Using SQL is a little bit overkill > > > > > > why bother with

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-31 Thread Cesar Rodas
On 30/03/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I'm looking at using Sqlite as a storage backend for a program. > > > Using SQL is a little bit overkill > > > > why bother with SQLite then? Use the right tool for the job > > -- use BerkeleyDB.

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-30 Thread John Stanton
Why not implement a simple index file system like one of the DBase derivatives? If you have no OS you will find porting something like Sqlite or Berkely DB a challenge. If you are not looking for SQL then you can achieve your goal in maybe 20K of memory. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: P Kisho

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-30 Thread rhurst2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm looking at using Sqlite as a storage backend for a program. > > > > Using SQL is a little bit overkill > > > > > > why bother with SQLite then? Use the right tool for the job > > > -- use BerkeleyDB. > > > > > >

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-30 Thread drh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I'm looking at using Sqlite as a storage backend for a program. > > > Using SQL is a little bit overkill > > > > why bother with SQLite then? Use the right tool for the job > > -- use BerkeleyDB. > > > > Size is a constraint for me. > I see that SQLite

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-30 Thread rhurst2
P Kishor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/29/07, Ludvig Strigeus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm looking at using Sqlite as a storage backend for a program. Using SQL is > > a little bit overkill and much more than we need. How complicated would it > > be to interface to the

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-29 Thread P Kishor
On 3/29/07, Ludvig Strigeus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, I'm looking at using Sqlite as a storage backend for a program. Using SQL is a little bit overkill and much more than we need. How complicated would it be to interface to the btree subsystem directly? Sqlite seems very modular from the l

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-29 Thread Martin Jenkins
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Martin Jenkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Very true. Furthermore, the B-Tree interface layer is not a part of the published API and as such it is subject to change without notice and between point releases. I nearly said that the B-Tree interface was unpublished bu

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-29 Thread drh
Martin Jenkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ludvig Strigeus wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm looking at using Sqlite as a storage backend for a program. Using > > SQL is a little bit overkill... > > ... I reckon learning that SQL would be a lot easier than > learning to use and/or coding against the B

Re: [sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-29 Thread Martin Jenkins
Ludvig Strigeus wrote: Hi, I'm looking at using Sqlite as a storage backend for a program. Using SQL is a little bit overkill and much more than we need. How complicated would it be to interface to the btree subsystem directly? Sqlite seems very modular from the looks of it, but has anyone att

[sqlite] Using the Sqlite Btree Backend directly

2007-03-29 Thread Ludvig Strigeus
Hi, I'm looking at using Sqlite as a storage backend for a program. Using SQL is a little bit overkill and much more than we need. How complicated would it be to interface to the btree subsystem directly? Sqlite seems very modular from the looks of it, but has anyone attempted anything like this